Study Yevamot folio 67B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
אין חוששין למיעוטא. ואיבעית אימא: לעולם קסבר חוששין למיעוטא, דעבדינן ליה תקנתא כרב נחמן אמר שמואל.
that we are not concerned about the minority of cases. Only a minority of fetuses are male inheritors, as roughly half are female, and some are stillborn. Therefore, the majority of fetuses will not become male children. And if you wish, say that actually he holds that we are concerned about the minority. However, we make an arrangement for the slaves, in accordance with what Rav Naḥman said that Shmuel said.
דאמר רב נחמן אמר שמואל: יתומים שבאו לחלוק בנכסי אביהם, בית דין מעמידין להם אפוטרופוס, ובורר להם חלק יפה. הגדילו — יכולין למחות. ורב נחמן דידיה אמר: הגדילו — אין יכולין למחות, דאם כן מה כח בית דין יפה.
This is as Rav Naḥman said that Shmuel said: With regard to minor orphans who came to court to divide up their father’s property, the court appoints for each of them a steward [apotropos], and he selects for them a fine share. When the orphans have grown up, they may object to the manner in which the property was divided and redistribute it. And Rav Naḥman himself said that when they have grown up they may not object, as, if they may object, what good is the power of the court? Here too, an appointed steward selects a share of the inheritance on behalf of the fetus, and this share does not include any of the slaves. Therefore, the slaves may partake of teruma. However, if all of the children are females, this arrangement is impossible because if the fetus is a son all the property belongs to him.
Based on the use of Rav Naḥman’s ruling to explain R' Shimon’s opinion, the Talmud suggests: Let us say that Rav Naḥman’s opinion is corresponding to one side of a dispute between tanna’im, as the Rabbis disagree with R' Shimon. The Talmud rejects this suggestion: No; it is possible that everyone in the dispute accepts Rav Naḥman’s ruling, and here they disagree only with regard to whether we are concerned about the minority, as previously suggested, in a case where the arrangement was not made.